Strategic Financial Performance Evaluation of the Turkish Companies Traded on Istanbul Stock Exchange

Öz

Son yıllarda işletmelerin stratejik finansal performanslarının değerlendirilmesi özellikle rekabetçi ekonomik çevrelerde önemli hale gelmiştir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı; İMKB-30 endeksinde işlem gören imalat sanayi işletmelerinin yedi stratejik finansal performans ölçütüne göre çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) teknikleri olarak bilinen Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (BAHP) ve VIKOR (VI_sekriterijumsko KOmpromisno Rangiranje) yöntemi ile değerlendirilmesidir. İşletmelerin değerlendirilmesinde ele alınan bu yedi finansal ölçüt, en yaygın değer temelli finansal performans ölçütleri olarak bilinmektedir. Çalışmada ele alınan yedi ölçüt şunlardır; Ekonomik Katma Değer (EVA), Arındırılmış Ekonomik Katma Değer (REVA), Gerçek Katma Değer (E-EVA), Piyasa Katma Değeri (MVA), Yatırımın Nakit Akım Karlılığı (CFROI) ve Nakit Katma Değer (CVA). Çalışmada performans ölçütlerinin ağırlıkları BAHP ile belirlenmiştir. İşletmeler stratejik finansal performans ölçütlerinin hem 1998-2011 dönemindeki her bir yılına ait değerleri ve hem de ölçütlerin bu dönemi kapsayan ortalama değerleri bakımından VIKOR yöntemi ile sıralanmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Stratejik performans ölçütleri, performans değerlendirmesi, ÇKKV, BAHP, VIKOR, İMKB-30

Strategic Financial Performance Evaluation of the Turkish Companies Traded on ISE

Öz

Strategic financial performance evaluation has been more important in a highly competitive environment. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the Turkish industrial companies traded on Istanbul Stock Exchange 30 (ISE-30) with respect to seven strategic financial performance measures by using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and VIKOR (VI_sekriterijumsko KOmpromisno Rangiranje) method which are known as Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods. The strategic performance measures used for performance evaluation are mostly known as the value-based financial performance measures. These seven performance measures are as follows; Economic Value Added (EVA), Refined Economic Value Added (REVA), Equity Economic Value Added (E-EVA), True Value Added (TVA), Market Value Added (MVA), Cash Flow Return on Investment (CFROI) and Cash Value Added (CVA), respectively. In this study, the weights of the performance measures are obtained by using FAHP. The companies are ranked with respect to their strategic financial performance measures’ values for each year for the period 1998-2011, and also ranked with respect to the average values of these measures for the related period by using the VIKOR method

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Strategic performance measures, performance evaluation, MCDM, FAHP, VIKOR, ISE-30

Kaynakça

1. Akalu, M.M. ve Turner, J.R. (2002) “Adding Shareholder Value Through Project Performance MVA, or Traditional Performance Measures for the Measurement, Monitoring & Control: A Critical Hospitality Industry?” International Journal of Hospitality Review” Erasmus Research Institute of Management Research Paper Series, No:38.
2. Bacidore, J.M., Boquist, J.A., Milbourn, T.T. ve Thakor, A.V. (1997) “The Search for the Best Financial Performance Measure” Financial Analysts, 11-20.
3. Chang, D.Y. (1996) “Applications of the Extent Analysis Method on Fuzzy AHP” European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3):649-655.
4. Chang, D.Y. (1992) “Extent Analysis and
5. Return On Investment, A Total System Approach to Valuing
6. The Firm, Great Britain, Butterworth-Heinemann
7. Synthetic Decision” Optimization Techniques and
8. Applications,1:352. Finance.

9. Clinton, B.D. ve Chen, S. (1998) “Do New Performance Measures Measure Up?” Management Accounting, 80:38- 43.
10. Damodaran, A. (1998) “Value Creation and Enhancement: Back to the Future” Contemporary Finance Digest, 2:5-52.
11. Damodaran, A, (2002) Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining The Value of Any Assets, New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc.
12. Ercan, M,K., Öztürk, M.B., Başcı, E.S. ve Demirgüneş, K. (2006) Firma Değerlemesi: Banka Uygulaması, İstanbul, Literatür Yayınları.
13. Ertuğrul, İ. ve Karakaşoğlu, N. (2009) “Performance Evaluation of Turkish Cement Firms with Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and TOPSIS Methods” Expert Systems with Applications, 36:702-715.
14. Evans, M.H. (1999) “Creating Value Through Macroeconomic Fluctuations in Value Based
15. Management” The Research Institute of Industrial Financial Management” http://www.exinfm.com, (07.07.2011)
16. Feng, C.M. ve Wang, R.T. (2000) “Performance Evaluation for Airlines Including the Consideration of Financial Ratios” Journal of Air Transport Management, 6:133-142.
17. Hejazi, R. ve Oskouei, M.M. (2007) “The Information Content of Cash Value Added (CVA) and P/E Ratio: Evidence on Association with Stock Returns for Industrial Companies in the Tehran Stock Exchange” Iranian Accounting & Auditing Review, 14:21-36.
18. Kramer, J.K. ve Pushner, J.R. (2001) “An Inter Industry Analysis of Economic Value Added as a Proxy for market Value Added” Journal of Applied Finance, 11:41-49.
19. Lee, S. ve Kim, W.G. (2009) “EVA, Refined EVA, Management, 28:439-44.
20. Lehn, K. ve Makhija, A.K. (1997) “EVA, Accounting Profits and CEO Turnover” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 10:90-97.
21. Lehn, K. ve Makhija, A.K. (1996) “EVA and MVA: As Performance Measures and Signal for Strategic Change” Strategy and Leadership, 24:34-39.
22. Madden B.J. (1999) CFROI Valuation:Cash Flow
23. Makelainen, E. (1999) “Economic Value Added as a Management Tool” Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper.
24. Martin, J.D. ve Petty, J.W. (2000) Value Based Management: The Corporate Response to the Shareholder Revolution, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
25. Milunovich, S. ve Tsuie, A. (1996) “EVA in the Computer Industry” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 9:104-115.
26. Mohanty, P. (2003) “In Defense EVA” Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series.
27. Opricovic, S. (1998), “Multi-Criteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems” Faculty of Civil Engineering Woırking Paper.
28. Oxelheim, L. ve Wihlborg, C.(2002) “Recognizing Economics Working Paper.
29. Smith, J.M. (2006) “Using A Balanced Scorecard as A Strategic Tool in Public Purchasing” Second International Public Procurement Conference Proceedings, 21-23 September, Italy.
30. Stewart, G.B. (1980) “EVA: Fact & Fantasy” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7:72-84.
31. Stewart, G.B., (1991) The Quest for Value, New York , Harper Business.
32. Wang, Y.J.(2008) “Applying FMCDM to Evaluate Financial Performance of Domestic Airlines in Taiwan” Expert Systems with Applications, 34:1837-1845.
33. Yalçın S.N., Bayrakdaroğlu, A. ve Kahraman, C. (2009) “Fuzzy Performance Evaluation in Turkish Banking Sector using Analytic Hierarchy Process and TOPSIS” Expert Systems with Applications, 36:11699- 11709.
34. Yalcin, N., Bayrakdaroglu, A. ve Kahraman, C. (2012) “Application of Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods for Financial Performance Evaluation of Turkish Manufacturing Industries” Expert Systems with Applications, 39:350-364.
35. Yang, T., Chen, M. ve Hung, C. (2007) “Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods for the Dynamic Operator Allocation Problem” Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 73:285-299.
36. Yook, K.C. ve McCabe, G.M. (2001) “MVA and the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns” The Journal of Portfolio Management, 27:75-87.
37. Young D.S. and O.Byrne S.F. (2001) EVA and Value- Based Management A Practical Guide to Implementation, USA, Mc Graw-Hill.
38. Yurdakul, M. ve İç, Y.T. (2003) “An illustrative Study Aimed to Measure and Rank Performance of Turkish Automotive Companies Using TOPSIS” Journal of The Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 18:1-18.
39. Zadeh, L.A. (1965) “Fuzzy Sets” Information Control, 8:338-353.
40. Zimmermann, H.J. (1991) Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications, 2nd Edition, London, Kluwer Academic Publishers.